Compare phones
| Global Score | |
| 80.1 | 76.1 |
| Basic Information | |
| Samsung | Motorola |
| Android 8.0 Oreo | Android 11, 10 |
| 2020-04-04 | 2020-04-16 |
| 6.24 x 3.18 x 0.56 inches | 6.29 x 2.99 x 0.38 inches |
| 9.03 ounces | 7.02 ounces |
| Black | Smoke black |
| Plastic | Aluminum and Plastic |
| $ 1105.00 | $ 150.00 |
| Display / Screen | |
| 5.1 inches | 6.4 inches |
| 2560 x 1440 pixels (Quad HD / 2K) | 2300 x 1080 pixels |
| -- | IPS LCD |
| 576 pixels per inch | 397 pixels per inch |
| No touch screen | No touch screen |
| 8.9 | 8 |
| Performance | |
| Samsung Exynos 9810 chipset | Qualcomm Snapdragon 665 SM6125 chipset |
| Exynos M3 and ARM Cortex-A55, 64-bit, 10 nm (Octa-Core 2700 MHz) processor | Kryo 260, 64-bit, 11 nm (Octa-Core 2000 MHz) processor |
| 4 GB RAM | 4 GB RAM |
| Mali-G72 MP18 GPU | Adreno 610 GPU |
| 9.45 | 9.09 |
| Storage | |
| 64 GB internal memory | 64 GB internal memory |
| microSDXC (up to 512 GB) external memory slot | microSDXC (up to 512 GB) external memory slot |
| 11.74 | 11.74 |
| Camera | |
| 12.00 MP + 8.00 MP | 16.00 MP + 16.00 MP |
| f/1.50 aperture | f/1.70 aperture |
| 0.39 inches (1/2.55") sensor | 0.36 inches (1/2.8") sensor |
| 1920 x 1080 (Full HD) video resolution | 3840 x 2160 (30 fps) (4K) video resolution |
| -- | 1920 x 1080 (60 fps) (Full HD) slow motion video |
| 8.14 | 10.01 |
| Networks | |
| Wi-Fi | Wi-Fi |
| Mobile Hotspot | Mobile Hotspot |
| LTE-A (4G), LTE (4G), HSPA+ (4G), HSDPA and HSUPA | LTE-A (4G), LTE (4G), HSPA+ (4G), HSDPA and HSUPA |
| Nano SIM | Nano SIM |
| 6.7 | 6.7 |
| Battery Life | |
| 4500mAh Battery | 5000mAh Li - Polymer Battery |
| Removable Battery | Non-Removable Battery |
| 6.32 | 6.8 |
| Other Features | |
| Bluetooth 5.0 | Bluetooth 5.0 |
| GPS | GPS |
| NFC | -- |
| Fingerprint ID Scanner | Fingerprint ID Scanner |
| Accelerometer, Barometer, Compass, Gyroscope, Light Sensor and Proximity Sensor | Accelerometer, Compass, Gyroscope, Light Sensor and Proximity Sensor |
| -- | FM Radio |
Comparison review
Samsung Galaxy XCover FieldPro has an overall score of 80.1, which is a little bit better than Moto G Power's 76.1 overall score. Although it's the best in this comparison, Samsung Galaxy XCover FieldPro's design is incredibly heavier and notably thicker than the Moto G Power. These phones come with Android OS, but Samsung Galaxy XCover FieldPro has 8.0 Oreo version while Moto G Power has Android 11, so it provides you lots of additional features.
Samsung Galaxy XCover FieldPro has a much better display than Moto G Power, because although it has a way smaller display, it also counts with a greater screen density and a better resolution of 1440 x 2560. Galaxy XCover FieldPro counts with just a little better hardware performance than Moto G Power. They have 8 processing cores and 4 GB of RAM memory.
The Moto G Power captures a lot better videos and photos than Samsung Galaxy XCover FieldPro, because although it has a smaller aperture and a smaller back camera sensor taking less light and duller colors, it also counts with a way better 3840x2160 (4K) video definition and a camera with a lot higher 16 mega-pixels resolution.
The Moto G Power counts with as much storage for applications, games, photos and videos as Samsung Galaxy XCover FieldPro, both have a slot for an external memory card that allows a maximum of 512 GB and exactly the same internal storage capacity. The Moto G Power counts with a little better battery life than Galaxy XCover FieldPro, because it has an 11 percent larger battery size.
Although Samsung Galaxy XCover FieldPro is a better device, it costs a lot more than the Moto G Power, and it doesn't have such a good quality/price relation as Moto G Power. So if you want that extra specs, you can buy Samsung Galaxy XCover FieldPro, else you can save a couple dollars and get the Moto G Power, letting go some specs and features.
Disclaimer: As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases.